|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-25-2017, 06:06 PM
|
| |
But it does add something. Alice never presents a dead end imposed by poorly planned nomenclature. Otherwise, you are
correct; Alice conveys no more and no less information than K-1. It is just a name, but a name not pinned to a one way street with a definite end of
cycle.
Of course, the cycle can just be restarted. And that has indeed been done, with its own inherent problems. Witness the continual confusion between
the KX and K-x.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-25-2017, 01:56 PM
|
| |
How does this make sense? How does someone know that Pentax specs go up with smaller numbers, while Nikon goes down in spec with lower numbers?
That requires foreknowledge; it is not inherent in the naming scheme.
On the other hand, it's almost a certain bet the 2015 Alice will be of higher spec than the 2012 Alice. Same for the Tom, Hector, Dave and the ever popular
Ninja Rocket Man.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-25-2017, 01:29 PM
|
| |
First question: Yes.
Second question: That's what spec sheets are for. No un-educated person knows the difference between a K-1, D850 or 5D Mark IV, and those
numbers give no indication which might be of higher spec.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-25-2017, 11:28 AM
|
| |
They did indeed run out of numbers. The K-7/K-5/K-3 sequence was cut short by the fullframe K-1. The K-1 is itself a dead end.
K-1ii, (K-1 'two', K-1 'too'), sounds like a regression.
Once again I purpose that Ricoh, et al, get away from sequential numbering and simply give each product line a name. Distinctions between
model versions can simply be made by the year the product was released. Thus, the top of the line APS-C line could be named 'Alice'.
The entry level named 'Tom'. The full frame named 'Hector'. Etc. Rather than comparing a K-5ii vs a K-3ii, you would simply compare the
2012 Alice vs the 2015 Alice.
It works for cars, (among other things); why not cameras?
|
